Connect with us

Censorship

BOMBSHELL: New documents reveal that CISA tried censoring pro-Trump tweets in attempt to hide potential election fraud

Published

on

Today, America First Legal (AFL) released documents obtained from litigation against the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), revealing CISA flagged text messages supporting President Donald J. Trump for potential censorship. 

Documents previously obtained by AFL reveal that CISA was actively working to censor narratives about mail-in voting risks as “disinformation” ahead of the 2020 election. These new documents released today reveal that even after the election took place, CISA continued to be more concerned with securing Director Krebs’s narrative that this was “the most secure in American history,” rather than investigating whether the election was actually secure.

CISA Flagging Pro-Trump Political Text Messages

On November 9, 2020, the day after the 2020 election, Brian Scully, a member of the “DHS Countering Foreign Interference Task Force” of CISA, sent an email with the subject “Text Msgs.” The email contained screenshots of fundraising texts for President Trump and the #StopTheSteal effort.

In his email, Scully noted, “A text message I just received. Fundraising around stop the steal.” 

A colleague at CISA replied “What’s your thoughts on how to handle? Or just for FYSA?” This email suggests that CISA was looking for every opportunity to take action to potentially censor conservative pro-Trump speech. 

Scully replied, “I think FYSA. Not sure we can do anything with something I get on my own.”

CISA’s Post-election “Disinformation Sitrep”

After election day, CISA continued to collect mis- and dis-information reports through “official channels” and “3rd Party fact checkers.” Despite CISA’s understanding that the 2020 election actually presented more risks due to the widespread adoption of mail-in voting, CISA officials automatically assumed all reported suspicions of fraud to be part of a “False Narrative” that required “counter-messaging.”

VIEW DOCUMENTS REVEALED BELOW:

Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

Big Tech Censorship

Elon Musk Threatens Legal Action Over ‘Advertising Boycott Racket’ Targeting Right-Leaning Media

Published

on

Elon Musk threatened legal action on Thursday against an alliance of major companies, accusing them of participating in an “advertising boycott racket” that has exacerbated a revenue decline at his social media platform, X.

Musk, who acquired the company formerly known as Twitter for $44 billion in 2022, made the announcement in response to a video of Daily Wire founder Ben Shapiro’s Congressional testimony. Shapiro’s testimony addressed alleged collusion by advertisers against right-leaning platforms.

“Having seen the evidence unearthed today by Congress, X has no choice but to file suit against the perpetrators and collaborators in the advertising boycott racket,” Musk wrote on X. “Hopefully, some states will consider criminal prosecution.”

Elon Musk’s threat follows Shapiro’s testimony before a House Judiciary panel during a hearing entitled “Collusion in the Global Alliance for Responsible Media (GARM).” GARM, an initiative by the World Federation of Advertisers (WFA), aims to tackle harmful content on digital media platforms and its monetization through advertising. WFA’s members, including Disney, Coca-Cola, Toyota, and Hershey, represent nearly 90% of global advertising spending, amounting to almost $1 trillion annually.

During the hearing, Shapiro and lawmakers focused on the conduct of GARM chief Robert Rakowitz. An interim House staff report highlighted Rakowitz’s questionable behavior, including an internal email from February 9, 2023, where Rakowitz appeared to boast about X being “80% below revenue forecasts” after GARM’s challenges on brand safety issues. Rakowitz claimed the email was a “self-effacing joke.”

The House report also unveiled biases against conservative media. An email exchange from October 2021 between Rakowitz and John Montgomery, EVP of global brand safety at GroupM, the world’s largest media buying agency, discussed blocking certain news outlets like Fox News, The Daily Wire, and Breitbart News. Montgomery admitted, “As much as we hated their ideology and bulls—t, we couldn’t really justify blocking them for misguided opinion,” but noted that they monitored these outlets closely and acted when they “crossed the line.”

In light of these revelations, Musk has urged for both civil and criminal repercussions. “Hopefully, some states will consider criminal prosecution,” Musk stated, highlighting the severity of the alleged collusion.

Representatives for GARM, GroupM, and X did not immediately respond to requests for comment on Musk’s post. Shapiro, in his opening statement shared by Musk, called on Congress to address what he termed as “censorship cartels like GARM and executive branch agencies” that oppose conservative views. The subcommittee is currently evaluating whether existing civil and criminal penalties, along with antitrust law enforcement efforts, are adequate to deter anti-competitive collusion in online advertising.

This development underscores the growing tension between major tech platforms, advertisers, and political entities over content moderation and free speech. Musk’s aggressive stance signals a potential legal battle that could have significant implications for the future of digital advertising and media bias.

As the situation evolves, the spotlight remains on whether the legal threats will materialize and how they might influence the practices of global advertisers and media platforms.

Continue Reading

Censorship

Journalist threatened with jail for publishing trans shooter Audrey Hale’s deranged journal writings

Published

on

A journalist from the Tennessee Star is being summoned to appear in court and faces jail time for publishing journal writings of transgender shooter Audrey Hale, sparking freedom of the press concerns.

The article revealed that Hale, who shot and killed six people at the Covenant Elementary School in March 2023, wrote about her ‘imaginary penis’ and how she would ‘kill’ to get puberty blockers weeks before her horrific act.

For more than a year, Nashville Chancellor I’Ashea Myles has been presiding over a public records case wherein the plaintiffs are suing to get the right to release documents related to the shooting. Families of the victims are on the exact opposite side, trying to bury the documents and keep them out of the public eye.

But since the case is ongoing, Myles is claiming that the Tennessee Star may have published ‘certain purported documents and information’ that should have remained under seal.

At Myle’s request, Tennessee Star editor-in-chief Michael Patrick Leahy will appear in court Monday to explain why his news outlet didn’t violate the court order.

Michael Patrick Leahy, CEO of Star News Digital Media and editor-in-chief of the Tennessee Star
Nashville Chancellor I’Ashea Myles, who’s been presiding over the public records fight over Audrey Hale’s manifesto
Michael Patrick Leahy, left, is the CEO of Star News Digital Media and editor-in-chief of the Tennessee Star. Nashville Chancellor I’Ashea Myles has ordered Leahy to appear in court because of the Star’s reporting on Audrey Hale’s journal writings.

Leahy, who also serves as CEO of Star News Digital Media, publisher of the Tennessee Star, claims his outlet has done nothing wrong throughout the course of its reporting.

The Star has claimed a June 5 story didn’t actually publish any of the leaked images of her journal entries but just snippets from it, reported the Associated Press.

‘This could raise First Amendment issues,’ said Deborah Fisher, Tennessee Coalition for Open Government’s executive director.

Jeff Clark, a former US attorney, also sided with Leahy, saying he was just doing a journalist’s job and getting crucial information about the shooting.

Leahy ‘is in jeopardy in Tennessee state court for trying to get out the Covenant Killer Audrey Hale’s “manifesto.” And presumably other info about her,’ Clark wrote on X.

‘The American people deserve to know the details of how Hale was radicalized by the trans agenda. And the victims’ family especially deserve to learn that information.’

Hale, 28, was a transgender artist, who identified as a male named Aiden, shot her way into the Tennessee elementary school in March 2023, killing three adults and three nine-year-olds, before responding officers killed her.

Officers found her writings in the car she drove to the elementary school, and the Star reported on ‘nearly four dozen images of notebook pages written by Hale’ provided by a source familiar with the investigation.

Hale wrote about anger toward her parents, how she hated her conservative Christian upbringing, and how she had suffered because hormone blockers were not available when she was a child.

One of her entries was ‘My Imaginary Penis’ and included a crude drawing, according to the Tennessee Star.

‘My penis exists in my head. I swear to god I’m a male,’ Hale wrote in the papers.

She then wrote about her desire to have a penis so she could have sex with a woman, in her assumed identity as Aiden.

She wrote about how using that name on a job application for a delivery position led to issues with the company’s background check.

Hale also said that being raised as a girl was ‘torture.’

She worried that high school classmates would call her ‘dyke or a f*‘, she wrote.

That all changed when she learned about transgenderism in her early 20s.

‘I finally found the answer — that changing one’s gender is possible,’ wrote Hale.

After the Star’s reporting throughout June, the Nashville’s Metropolitan Police said in a statement that ‘it is concerned about the alleged leak, and we, like others, would like to know from where it came.’

Immediately following the shooting, Nashville’s police chief John Drake said Hale’s manifesto as well as the hand-drawn maps found in her car would eventually be made public.

Now, despite the leaks, both city police and the FBI say the material shouldn’t be released because the information could damage any potential investigation.

In a statement to The Center Square, Leahy said he plans to defend his and his outlet’s rights to publish relevant information about the shooting.

‘Yes, I intend to appear in court on Monday at 11 am, along with my attorneys, Nick Barry with America First Legal and Daniel Horwitz, a nationally recognized First Amendment attorney based here in Nashville,’ Leahy told The Center Square Sunday.

Continue Reading

Censorship

Alex Jones Ordered to Liquidate Personal Assets to Pay Sandy Hook Debt

Published

on

A federal judge has ordered the liquidation of conspiracy theorist Alex Jones’ personal assets to help pay the $1.5 billion debt he owes for his false claims that the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting was a hoax. This decision was made on Friday, while the judge is still considering the bankruptcy case of Jones’ company, Free Speech Systems, which owns the Infowars media platform.

Judge Christopher Lopez approved the conversion of Jones’ proposed personal bankruptcy reorganization to a liquidation. Jones’ personal assets, including his Texas ranch valued at about $2.8 million and a gun collection, will be sold off to pay debts. However, his primary home in the Austin area and some other belongings are exempt from the liquidation.

The fate of Free Speech Systems is still uncertain. If the company is also liquidated, Jones would lose control of Infowars, including its studios, equipment, social media accounts, and copyrights. A bankruptcy trustee would oversee the liquidation process. The Sandy Hook families are also seek ing to take control of Jones’ personal social media accounts, which he opposes.

The legal battles stem from Jones’ false claims that the 2012 Sandy Hook shooting, which killed 20 first graders and six educators in Newtown, Connecticut, was a hoax. Relatives of the victims won lawsuit judgments totaling more than $1.4 billion in Connecticut and $49 million in Texas. These families have testified about the harassment and threats they faced from Jones’ followers, some of whom claimed the shooting never happened.

The Sandy Hook families’ lawyers argue that liquidating Free Speech Systems would allow them to enforce their judgments and prevent Jones from continuing to inflict harm through his broadcasts. Chris Mattei, a lawyer for the families in the Connecticut case, stated that the liquidation would “deprive Jones of the ability to inflict mass harm as he has done for some 25 years.”

Jones and Free Speech Systems initially filed for bankruptcy reorganization protection, which would have allowed Jones to continue running Infowars while using revenue to pay the families. However, the parties could not agree on a final plan, leading to the current push for liquidation.

Jones has been vocal about his belief that the legal actions against him are part of a conspiracy by Democrats and the “deep state” to shut down his companies and silence his free speech. He has also accused the Sandy Hook families of being used as pawns in this alleged conspiracy.

The Sandy Hook families have a pending lawsuit in Texas accusing Jones of illegally diverting and hiding millions of dollars, allegations which Jones denies. As the legal proceedings continue, the future of Infowars and Jones’ ability to continue his broadcasts remains uncertain.

Continue Reading

Trending